What constitues an elite time?

[Soots]

What do people reckon constititutes an elite time/performance for a particular 'standard' distance?

So for example, i've managed to post in the top 2% for 5K this season in the 40-49 age bracket.

Is there a general yardstick standard by which you can measure yourself on the erg? As in at 40-49 any time below x for 5000m is an elite performance.

[hjs]

What do people reckon constititutes an elite time/performance for a particular 'standard' distance?

So for example, i've managed to post in the top 2% for 5K this season in the 40-49 age bracket.

Is there a general yardstick standard by which you can measure yourself on the erg? As in at 40-49 any time below x for 5000m is an elite performance.

Depends how you look at, the very best row 15 min flat on a 5k, in the 40 plus cath around 17 min is pretty good, in my book that is not elite. A pretty fit guy who traines seriously could reach that with a bit of talent.
The rankings have a problem, by far all times are not ranked.

[Bob S.]

The rankings have a problem, by far all times are not ranked.

hjs has a good point there. Elite rowers of the national team level often do not post erg scores. The erg is simply a tool to use when it is not practical to go out on the water. In fact, nowadays a lot of national teams and college teams as well have switched over from the static ergs to some form of dynamic, a C2 D or E on slides, the C2 dynamic model, or other brands. The times set on other brands cannot be compared with C2 records. The times set on the C2 dynamic model are listed separately the other times and the same with the C2 D or E on slides - if they are reported honestly.

The amount of interest in competition on the static C2 machines is quite an interesting anomaly. How many competitive cyclists would be interested in fixed cycling machines? How successful would weightlifting competitions be if they were done with machines instead of free weights? Erg competitions, which are done only of grounded C2 model Ds, are surprisingly successful, especially in the UK, but there is not a lot of participation by elite OTW rowers and it appears that the number of college participants is starting to fall off as well. The switchover to the use of dynamic machine for training is growing.

Bob S.

[jvincent]

What do people reckon constititutes an elite time/performance for a particular 'standard' distance?

I would consider "elite" in any sports based event to be somebody who is competitive at the world level. That is probably less than 1% of people who are serious in a given sport.

For smaller sample sizes the math is probably different too so if you limit it to the 40-49 age group I'm not sure if it makes sense to categorize it that way. I just looked, and there are only 295 ranked times for 5K, so even using the 1% metric you'd need to be top-3.

[Hross]

Any result in the top 1% of an age group is elite. National team results are interesting, but I would venture to guess most in their 40's have full time jobs. If you can be in the top 1% you are elite in my book. Anyone even entering a score in the log is already outside the norm.

[Carl Watts]

Top 5% for me, but it depends on your definition of Elite.

You have to rememember that there are very few people at the Elite level anyway and even though none of these may bother with the ranking, neither do the thousands of other people at the other end who's time is so bad they don't bother ranking either.

The end result is that if you have a couple of top people in the rankings represrnting by number the proportion of all the elite rowers anyway and a pretty large sample of a few hundred people in your diviision, it gives you a pretty good idea of where you stand.

Age 40-49 if you can get below 18minutes for the 5Km your doing really well.

[jamesg]

a general yardstick

Over 9000 points here would put you well on the way to élite:
http://www.nonathlon.com/ranking.php

You only need to put in a pair of times to see your level; it'll also give you a guide to times for other distances.

[Cyclingman1]

What do people reckon constititutes an elite time/performance for a particular 'standard' distance?

Good question.
I think I would have to go with being in the top 1% of an age group to be considered elite. Even though I am older, 68, I'm a little reluctant to call top performances by older athletes elite. It is good that older athletes still perform well, but is that elite? Also, I don't think that if world class OTW rowers don't post on C2 that it matters much. Besides that only applies mostly to under 30 with some 30-39 rowers. As far as 40-49 rowers, I'm looking at around 17:15 for 5K to be considered elite. And I'm not totally convinced of that. Sub-17:00 may be more legit for elite. I'm pretty sure that I saw 1950 times for 5K, 40-49.

Over 9000 points here would put you well on the way to élite:
http://www.nonathlon.com/ranking.php

Again, maybe. I did 9270 last yr on ten events. I'm at 9178 on nine events this yr. I would not consider my yr or last yr as "elite." They were good, but I fell well short of what I think I should have been able to do. I was sick and hurt, but so what. I still not perform. Maybe some yr I'll have times I'm happy with relative to age. And those probably won't be elite.

Maybe it is all a word game. What some think is pretty good is elite to someone else or vice versa.

[ArmandoChavezUNC]

I would say elite is top 5% or so. Problem with basing that off the C2 ranking is that doesn't include everyone in the world, just those who post the scores on the site.

For 5k about a 1:33.00 split would be elite I'd think. For your age category probably a fair bit slower, but still pretty darn fast. Maybe 1:36/37?

[OarConsequences]

From the answers already given, clearly there is no defined level where a score is "elite" so you'll just have to go with calling yourself a 98th percentile rower for your category and let everyone else figure out if that's elite to them. Personally I think 5% is way too generous for elite level. I'd side more with the people who say 1%.

[rhr]

elite
eɪˈliːt,ɪ-/Submit
noun
1. a group of people considered to be superior in a particular society or organization.

That's a pretty broad definition! So I looked at the meaning of superior -
superior
suːˈpɪərɪə,sjuː-/Submit
adjective
1. higher in rank, status, or quality.

I agree with Henry - a reasonably fit guy can reach good times in a short period of time. I did. Since then I have switched to running more and it has taken more hours and effort to reach the 95th percentile in the 40-49 bracket. The number of participants is much higher and all times are logged when you compete in a 10k / HM or marathon. Perhaps I'm a better rower than runner as I have long limbs but I doubt it. I can safely and categorically state that I will never reach the top 1% in running in my age bracket.

Ultimately, for indoor rowing, I would say that the benchmark for being called "elite" would equate to someone being competitive on the world stage in their age group [past and present]. The world record for 40-49 5,000m heavyweight is 15:57 and 16:40 lightweight. If you could row under 16:20 as a heavyweight or 17:00 as a lightweight then you're an elite in my book. You can create a Watt curve off those times and build an elite time line across all the distances.